It is a central principle of law: Courts are supposed to follow earlier decisions – precedent – to resolve current disputes. But it’s inevitable that sometimes, the precedent has to go, and a court ...

As the Supreme Court has been debating judicial adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis recently, it bears remembering that litigants seeking a change in the law applicable to their case should ...

Editor’s Note: On Tuesday, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed the authenticity of a leaked draft of a decision that would appear to place the future of abortion rights, and in ...

In his account of why people, and nations, lie about their conduct in war, the political philosopher Michael Walzer observed: “Wherever we find hypocrisy, we also find moral knowledge.” The hypocrite ...

The prior-panel-precedent rule allows federal appellate courts to avoid considering “difficult arguments” and “to do its work with fewer judges more quickly,” said a legal scholar who is not involved ...

Imagine you're crafting an argument in an appellate court. The key statute has language that favors you, but a decades-old Supreme Court case goes the opposite way. Or, from the other side, the case ...

WASHINGTON (CN) — Rulings from the Supreme Court hold enormous weight because unlike bills from Congress or executive orders from the president, their effectiveness is not dependent on the current ...

Kirsten Matoy Carlson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations ...

Although Supreme Court justices are by no means bound by their past decisions, they often respect them, for a variety of reasons. Justice Elena Kagan offered her reasons for remaining faithful to ...